Suicidal ideation in men during COVID-19: an examination of protective factors.

BACKGROUND: Men account for three-quarters of all suicide deaths in many Western nations including Australia. Whilst extensive research has examined risk factors for suicidal ideation and behaviour in men, protective factors remain underexplored, particularly social support, resilience and coping behaviours. Such factors are important to examine particularly in the context of COVID-19, where enforced isolation (among other negative lifestyle effects) has created widespread risk for the development of suicidal ideation. This mixed-methods study aimed to examine associations of various protective factors with suicidal ideation in men, using data from an online survey conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, we aimed to qualitatively investigate men's self-reported protective strategies when experiencing suicidal thoughts and behaviour. METHODS: A convenience sample of 700 men (age M = 50.3 years; SD = 15.2 years) responded to an online survey including quantitative measures of suicidal ideation, planning and attempt, alongside employment and relationship status, coping, social support, resilience, and a qualitative free-text item gauging men's self-reported protective strategies. Multinomial logistic regression was applied to compare odds of sub-categories of suicide risk (ideation; planning) according to protective factors. Qualitative responses were analysed via thematic analysis. RESULTS: Men in a relationship, and those lower in emotion-focused and avoidant coping reported lower odds of suicidal ideation. Maintaining employment throughout the pandemic was protective against suicidal ideation and planning; as was greater perceived social support from friends. Greater self-reported resilience was protective against suicidal ideation and planning. Qualitative analyses led to the development of two themes: coping and connecting, reflecting men's intra- and interpersonal management strategies; and sustaining selflessness, where men's imaginings of the collateral damage of their suicidal behaviour was protective against action on suicidal thoughts or plans. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this study speak to the nuanced roles of interpersonal connections, resilience and coping behaviours in protecting against suicidal ideation and planning in men. In addition, qualitative insights further cement men's identification with familial protector and/or provider roles as protective against suicidal action.

Probable COVID-19 infection is associated with subsequent poorer mental health and greater loneliness in the UK COVID-19 Mental Health and Wellbeing study.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been associated with psychological distress. In addition to physical effects including fatigue and cognitive impairment, contracting COVID-19 itself may also be related to subsequent negative mental health outcomes. The present study reports data from a longitudinal, national survey of the UK adult population investigating whether contracting suspected or confirmed COVID-19 at the early stages of the pandemic (March-May 2020) was associated with poorer mental health outcomes in May/June 2020, October/November 2020 and June/July 2021. A quota survey design and a sampling frame that permitted recruitment of a national sample (n = 3077) were utilised. Experience of contracting COVID-19 during the first UK lockdown was assessed along with levels of depression, anxiety, mental wellbeing and loneliness. Around 9% of participants reported contracting COVID-19 in March/May 2020 (waves 1-3) with just under 13% of the overall sample reporting COVID-19 at any one of the first three time points. Compared to those without probable COVID-19 infection, participants with probable COVID-19 had poorer mental health outcomes at follow-up with these effects lasting up to 13 months (e.g., May/June 2020:ORdepression = 1.70, p < 0.001; ORanxiety = 1.61, p = 0.002; Oct/Nov 2020, ORdepression = 1.82, p < 0.001; ORanxiety 1.56, p = 0.013; June/July 2021, ORdepression = 2.01, p < 0.001; ORanxiety = 1.67, p = 0.008). Having a pre-existing mental health condition was also associated with greater odds of having probable COVID-19 during the study (OR = 1.31, p = 0.016). The current study demonstrates that contracting probable COVID-19 at the early stage of the pandemic was related to long-lasting associations with mental health and the relationship between mental health status and probable COVID-19 is bidirectional.

HEART rate variability biofeedback for long COVID symptoms (HEARTLOC): protocol for a feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Long COVID (LC), also known as post-COVID-19 syndrome, refers to symptoms persisting 12 weeks after COVID-19 infection. It affects up to one in seven people contracting the illness and causes a wide range of symptoms, including fatigue, breathlessness, palpitations, dizziness, pain and brain fog. Many of these symptoms can be linked to dysautonomia or dysregulation of the autonomic nervous system after SARS-CoV2 infection. This study aims to test the feasibility and estimate the efficacy, of the heart rate variability biofeedback (HRV-B) technique via a standardised slow diaphragmatic breathing programme in individuals with LC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 30 adult LC patients with symptoms of palpitations or dizziness and an abnormal NASA Lean Test will be selected from a specialist Long COVID rehabilitation service. They will undergo a 4-week HRV-B intervention using a Polar chest strap device linked to the Elite HRV phone application while undertaking the breathing exercise technique for two 10 min periods everyday for at least 5 days a week. Quantitative data will be gathered during the study period using: HRV data from the chest strap and wrist-worn Fitbit, the modified COVID-19 Yorkshire Rehabilitation Scale, Composite Autonomic Symptom Score, WHO Disability Assessment Schedule and EQ-5D-5L health-related quality of life measures. Qualitative feedback on user experience and feasibility of using the technology in a home setting will also be gathered. Standard statistical tests for correlation and significant difference will be used to analyse the quantitate data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has received ethical approval from Health Research Authority (HRA) Leicester South Research Ethics Committee (21/EM/0271). Dissemination plans include academic and lay publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05228665.

Information seeking, mental health and loneliness: Longitudinal analyses of adults in the UK COVID-19 mental health and wellbeing study.

Information seeking has generally been seen as an adaptive response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it may also result in negative outcomes on mental health. The present study tests whether reporting COVID-related information seeking throughout the pandemic is associated with subsequently poorer mental health outcomes. A quota-based, non-probability-sampling methodology was used to recruit a nationally representative sample. COVID-related information seeking was assessed at six waves along with symptoms of depression, anxiety, mental wellbeing and loneliness (N = 1945). Hierarchical linear modelling was used to assess the relationship between COVID-related information seeking and mental health outcomes. Information seeking was found to reduce over time. Overall, women, older and higher socioeconomic group individuals reported higher levels of information seeking. At waves 1-4 (March-June 2020) the majority of participants reported that they sought information on Covid 1-5 times per day, this decreased to less than once per day in waves 5 and 6 (July-November 2020). Higher levels of information seeking were associated with poorer mental health outcomes, particularly clinically significant levels of anxiety. Use of a non-probability sampling method may have been a study limitation, nevertheless, reducing or managing information seeking behaviour may be one method to reduce anxiety during pandemics and other public health crises.

Information seeking, mental health and loneliness: Longitudinal analyses of adults in the UK COVID-19 Mental Health & Wellbeing study

Information-seeking has generally been seen as an adaptive response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it may also result in negative outcomes on mental health. The present study tests whether reporting COVID-related information-seeking throughout the pandemic is associated with subsequently poorer mental health outcomes. A quota-based, non-probability-sampling methodology was used to recruit a nationally representative sample. COVID-related information-seeking was assessed at six waves along with symptoms of depression, anxiety, mental wellbeing and loneliness (N = 1945). Hierarchical linear modelling was used to assess the relationship between COVID-related information-seeking and mental health outcomes. Information-seeking was found to reduce over time. Overall, women, older and higher socioeconomic group individuals reported higher levels of information-seeking. At waves 1-4 (March-June 2020) the majority of participants reported that they sought information on Covid 1-5 times per day, this decreased to less than once per day in waves 5 and 6 (July-November 2020). Higher levels of information-seeking were associated with poorer mental health outcomes, particularly clinically significant levels of anxiety. Use of a non-probability sampling method may have been a study limitation, nevertheless, reducing or managing information-seeking behaviour may be one method to reduce anxiety during pandemics and other public health crises.

Mental health and well-being during the second wave of COVID-19: longitudinal analyses of the UK COVID-19 Mental Health and Wellbeing study (UK COVID-MH)

BackgroundWaves 1 to 3 (March 2020 to May 2020) of the UK COVID-19 Mental Health and Wellbeing study suggested an improvement in some indicators of mental health across the first 6 weeks of the UK lockdown;however, suicidal ideation increased.AimsTo report the prevalence of mental health and well-being of adults in the UK from March/April 2020 to February 2021.MethodQuota sampling was employed at wave 1 (March/April 2020), and online surveys were conducted at seven time points. Primary analyses cover waves 4 (May/June 2020), 5 (July/August 2020), 6 (October 2020) and 7 (February 2021), including a period of increased restrictions in the UK. Mental health indicators were suicidal ideation, self-harm, suicide attempt, depression, anxiety, defeat, entrapment, loneliness and well-being.ResultsA total of 2691 (87.5% of wave 1) individuals participated in at least one survey between waves 4 and 7. Depressive symptoms and loneliness increased from October 2020 to February 2021. Defeat and entrapment increased from July/August 2020 to October 2020, and remained elevated in February 2021. Well-being decreased from July/August 2020 to October 2020. Anxiety symptoms and suicidal ideation did not change. Young adults, women, those who were socially disadvantaged and those with a pre-existing mental health condition reported worse mental health.ConclusionsThe mental health and well-being of the UK population deteriorated from July/August 2020 to October 2020 and February 2021, which coincided with the second wave of COVID-19. Suicidal thoughts did not decrease significantly, suggesting a need for continued vigilance as we recover from the pandemic.

The modified COVID-19 Yorkshire Rehabilitation Scale (C19-YRSm) patient-reported outcome measure for Long Covid or Post-COVID-19 syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The C19-YRS is the literature's first condition-specific, validated scale for patient assessment and monitoring in Post-COVID-19 syndrome (PCS). The 22-item scale's subscales (scores) are symptom severity (0-100), functional disability (0-50), additional symptoms (0-60), and overall health (0-10). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to test the scale's psychometric properties using Rasch analysis and modify the scale based on analysis findings, emerging information on essential PCS symptoms, and feedback from a working group of patients and professionals. METHODS: Data from 370 PCS patients were assessed using a Rasch Measurement Theory framework to test model fit, local dependency, response category functioning, differential item functioning, targeting, reliability, and unidimensionality. The working group undertook iterative changes to the scale based on the psychometric results and including essential symptoms. RESULTS: Symptom severity and functional disability subscales showed good targeting and reliability. Post hoc rescoring suggested that a 4-point response category structure would be more appropriate than an 11-point response for both subscales. Symptoms with binary responses were placed in the other symptoms subscale. The overall health single-item subscale remained unchanged. CONCLUSION: A 17-item C19-YRSm was developed with subscales (scores): symptom severity (0-30), functional disability (0-15), other symptoms (0-25), and overall health (0-10).

LOng COvid Multidisciplinary consortium Optimising Treatments and servIces acrOss the NHS (LOCOMOTION): protocol for a mixed-methods study in the UK.

INTRODUCTION: Long COVID, a new condition whose origins and natural history are not yet fully established, currently affects 1.5 million people in the UK. Most do not have access to specialist long COVID services. We seek to optimise long COVID care both within and outside specialist clinics, including improving access, reducing inequalities, helping self-management and providing guidance and decision support for primary care. We aim to establish a 'gold standard' of care by systematically analysing current practices, iteratively improving pathways and systems of care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This mixed-methods, multisite study is informed by the principles of applied health services research, quality improvement, co-design, outcome measurement and learning health systems. It was developed in close partnership with patients (whose stated priorities are prompt clinical assessment; evidence-based advice and treatment and help with returning to work and other roles) and with front-line clinicians. Workstreams and tasks to optimise assessment, treatment and monitoring are based in three contrasting settings: workstream 1 (qualitative research, up to 100 participants), specialist management in 10 long COVID clinics across the UK, via a quality improvement collaborative, experience-based co-design and targeted efforts to reduce inequalities of access, return to work and peer support; workstream 2 (quantitative research, up to 5000 participants), patient self-management at home, technology-supported monitoring and validation of condition-specific outcome measures and workstream 3 (quantitative research, up to 5000 participants), generalist management in primary care, harnessing electronic record data to study population phenotypes and develop evidence-based decision support, referral pathways and analysis of costs. Study governance includes an active patient advisory group. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: LOng COvid Multidisciplinary consortium Optimising Treatments and servIces acrOss the NHS study is sponsored by the University of Leeds and approved by Yorkshire & The Humber-Bradford Leeds Research Ethics Committee (ref: 21/YH/0276). Participants will provide informed consent. Dissemination plans include academic and lay publications, and partnerships with national and regional policymakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05057260, ISRCTN15022307.

How has physical distancing impacted on health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic? A Scottish longitudinal qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: This study provides an in-depth understanding of the impact of physical distancing restrictions and other quarantining measures during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic on physical and mental health and well-being. DESIGN: Longitudinal qualitative research using semistructured interviews at two time points (21 May to 10 June 2020 when the first restrictions were eased, and 2 to 26 August 2020 when many restrictions had been eased, but physical distancing measures remained) and framework analysis. SETTING: Interviews by telephone or video call in Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty participants: 16 women, 93% reporting white ethnicity, 18+ years, 47% from deprived areas, 47% reported mental and/or physical health conditions. RESULTS: Four main themes described the impact of physical distancing restrictions on (1) health behaviours; (2) healthcare access; (3) physical health; and (4) mental health. Changes in impact over the two time points were compared. For example, health behaviours in May/June, such as reduced physical activity and increased calorie intake, appeared to improve by August. From May/June to August, an increasing number of participants expressed dissatisfaction with healthcare they received. Participants with existing physical health conditions reported continued negative impact of restrictions on their physical health. All participants reported some negative mental health impact, mostly anxiety. An increasing number reported mental health improvements in August, with those with mental health conditions or under 30 years reporting improvement most frequently. CONCLUSIONS: In line with previous research, our participants felt able to return to prepandemic health habits. Our findings corroborate evidence of reduced preventive healthcare use and help-seeking behaviours. People with existing health conditions appear to be most vulnerable to negative mental and physical health impacts of physical distancing. These negative impacts and periods of unhealthy behaviours have potential long-term consequences, especially among already underserved groups. We recommend public health and policy strategies to mitigate long-term impacts of physical distancing.

Systematic review of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicidal behaviour amongst health and social care workers across the world.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on the mental health of healthcare and social care workers, and its potential effect on suicidal thoughts and behaviour is of particular concern. METHODS: This systematic review identified and appraised the published literature that has reported on the impact of COVID-19 on suicidal thoughts and behaviour and self-harm amongst healthcare and social care workers worldwide up to May 31, 2021. RESULTS: Out of 37 potentially relevant papers identified, ten met our eligibility criteria. Our review has highlighted that the impact of COVID-19 has varied as a function of setting, working relationships, occupational roles, and psychiatric comorbidities. LIMITATIONS: There have been no completed cohort studies comparing pre- and post-pandemic suicidal thoughts and behaviours. It is possible some papers may have been missed in the search. CONCLUSIONS: The current quality of evidence pertaining to suicidal behaviour in healthcare workers is poor, and evidence is entirely absent for those working in social care. The clinical relevance of this work is to bring attention to what evidence exists, and to encourage, in practice, proactive approaches to interventions for improving healthcare and social care worker mental health.

RETurn to work After stroKE (RETAKE) Trial: protocol for a mixed-methods process evaluation using normalisation process theory.

OBJECTIVES: This mixed-method process evaluation underpinned by normalisation process theory aims to measure fidelity to the intervention, understand the social and structural context in which the intervention is delivered and identify barriers and facilitators to intervention implementation. SETTING: RETurn to work After stroKE (RETAKE) is a multicentre individual patient randomised controlled trial to determine whether Early Stroke Specialist Vocational Rehabilitation (ESSVR) plus usual care is a clinically and cost-effective therapy to facilitate return to work after stroke, compared with usual care alone. This protocol paper describes the embedded process evaluation. PARTICIPANTS AND OUTCOME MEASURES: Intervention training for therapists will be observed and use of remote mentor support reviewed through documentary analysis. Fidelity will be assessed through participant questionnaires and analysis of therapy records, examining frequency, duration and content of ESSVR sessions. To understand the influence of social and structural contexts, the process evaluation will explore therapists' attitudes towards evidence-based practice, competency to deliver the intervention and evaluate potential sources of contamination. Longitudinal case studies incorporating non-participant observations will be conducted with a proportion of intervention and usual care participants. Semistructured interviews with stroke survivors, carers, occupational therapists, mentors, service managers and employers will explore their experiences as RETAKE participants. Analysis of qualitative data will draw on thematic and framework approaches. Quantitative data analysis will include regression models and descriptive statistics. Qualitative and quantitative data will be independently analysed by process evaluation and Clinical Trials Research Unit teams, respectively. Linked data, for example, fidelity and describing usual care will be synthesised by comparing and integrating quantitative descriptive data with the qualitative findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approval obtained through the East Midlands-Nottingham 2 Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 18/EM/0019) and the National Health ServiceResearch Authority. Dissemination via journal publications, stroke conferences, social media and meetings with national Stroke clinical leads. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12464275.

Changes in mental health problems and suicidal behaviour in students and their associations with COVID-19-related restrictions in Norway: a national repeated cross-sectional analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on higher education, with the closure of student campuses. The aim of this study was to examine changes and prevalence of mental health problems, suicidal ideation and suicidal behaviour, and their associations with COVID-19-related restrictions. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: As part of the SHoT-study in Norway, 62 498 students completed an online questionnaire (65.6% women; response rate of 34.4%) in March 2021. Data were compared with previous waves, conducted in 2018, 2014 and 2010. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Mental health problems were assessed using the Hopkins Symptoms Checklist. Suicidal ideation, suicide attempts and non-suicidal self-harm (NSSH) were assessed with three items drawn from the Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey, and thoughts of NSSH were assessed with one item from the Child and Adolescent Self-Harm in Europe study. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in mental health problems from 2010 to 2021, and especially from 2018 (men: 27%/women: 45%) to 2021 (men: 41%/women: 62%, p <0.001). A similar pattern was also observed for suicidal thoughts. Unlike previous waves, there were large geographical differences in mental health problems in 2021, which mapped onto the different levels of COVID-19 cases and regional COVID-19-related restrictions. There was a significant negative dose-response association between days spent physically on campus and both mental health problems and indicators of suicide risk. We found the fewer days spent on campus in the last 2 weeks, the higher levels of mental health problems during the same time period. There was also an association between days on campus and a higher prevalence of suicidal thoughts, NSSH and suicide attempts in the last year. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a sharp increase and disturbing levels of mental health problems and suicide risk among students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although causal conclusions cannot be drawn, the associations between closure of campuses and mental problems emphasise the importance of having access to campuses for student well-being.

The association between COVID-19-related fear and reported self-harm in a national survey of people with a lifetime history of self-harm.

BACKGROUND: Relatively little is known about the characteristics of people living in the community who have previously self-harmed and may benefit from interventions during and after COVID-19. We therefore aimed to: (a) examine the relationship between reported self-harm and COVID-19-related fear, and (b) describe the characteristics of a community sample of people who reported a lifetime history of self-harm. METHODS: A cross-sectional national online survey of UK adults who reported a lifetime history of self-harm (n = 1029) was conducted. Data were collected May - June 2020. Main outcomes were self-reported COVID-19-related fear (based on the Fear of COVID-19 scale [FCV-19S]), lifetime history of COVID-19, and lifetime history of self-harm. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression. Chi-square was used to compare characteristics of our sample with available national data. RESULTS: Overall, 75.1, 40.2 and 74.3% of the total sample reported lifetime suicidal ideation, suicidal attempts and non-suicidal self-harm respectively. When adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, social grade, and exposure to death and suicide, binary logistic regression showed higher levels of perceived symptomatic (or physiological) reactions to COVID-19 were associated with suicidal ideation (OR = 1.22, 95%CI 1.07, 1.39) and suicidal attempts (OR = 3.91, 95%CI 1.18, 12.96) in the past week. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest an urgent need to consider the impact of COVID-19 on people with a lifetime history of self-harm when designing interventions to help support people in reducing suicidal ideation and suicidal attempts. Experiencing symptomatic reactions of fear in particular is associated with self-harm. Helping to support people to develop coping plans in response to threat-related fear is likely to help people at risk of repeat self-harm during public health emergencies.

Suicide trends in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic: an interrupted time-series analysis of preliminary data from 21 countries.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic is having profound mental health consequences for many people. Concerns have been expressed that, at their most extreme, these consequences could manifest as increased suicide rates. We aimed to assess the early effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates around the world. METHODS: We sourced real-time suicide data from countries or areas within countries through a systematic internet search and recourse to our networks and the published literature. Between Sept 1 and Nov 1, 2020, we searched the official websites of these countries' ministries of health, police agencies, and government-run statistics agencies or equivalents, using the translated search terms "suicide" and "cause of death", before broadening the search in an attempt to identify data through other public sources. Data were included from a given country or area if they came from an official government source and were available at a monthly level from at least Jan 1, 2019, to July 31, 2020. Our internet searches were restricted to countries with more than 3 million residents for pragmatic reasons, but we relaxed this rule for countries identified through the literature and our networks. Areas within countries could also be included with populations of less than 3 million. We used an interrupted time-series analysis to model the trend in monthly suicides before COVID-19 (from at least Jan 1, 2019, to March 31, 2020) in each country or area within a country, comparing the expected number of suicides derived from the model with the observed number of suicides in the early months of the pandemic (from April 1 to July 31, 2020, in the primary analysis). FINDINGS: We sourced data from 21 countries (16 high-income and five upper-middle-income countries), including whole-country data in ten countries and data for various areas in 11 countries). Rate ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs based on the observed versus expected numbers of suicides showed no evidence of a significant increase in risk of suicide since the pandemic began in any country or area. There was statistical evidence of a decrease in suicide compared with the expected number in 12 countries or areas: New South Wales, Australia (RR 0·81 [95% CI 0·72-0·91]); Alberta, Canada (0·80 [0·68-0·93]); British Columbia, Canada (0·76 [0·66-0·87]); Chile (0·85 [0·78-0·94]); Leipzig, Germany (0·49 [0·32-0·74]); Japan (0·94 [0·91-0·96]); New Zealand (0·79 [0·68-0·91]); South Korea (0·94 [0·92-0·97]); California, USA (0·90 [0·85-0·95]); Illinois (Cook County), USA (0·79 [0·67-0·93]); Texas (four counties), USA (0·82 [0·68-0·98]); and Ecuador (0·74 [0·67-0·82]). INTERPRETATION: This is the first study to examine suicides occurring in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic in multiple countries. In high-income and upper-middle-income countries, suicide numbers have remained largely unchanged or declined in the early months of the pandemic compared with the expected levels based on the pre-pandemic period. We need to remain vigilant and be poised to respond if the situation changes as the longer-term mental health and economic effects of the pandemic unfold. FUNDING: None.

The COVID-19 Yorkshire Rehabilitation Scale (C19-YRS): Application and psychometric analysis in a post-COVID-19 syndrome cohort.

As our understanding of the nature and prevalence of post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) syndrome (PCS) is increasing, a measure of the impact of COVID-19 could provide valuable insights into patients' perceptions in clinical trials and epidemiological studies as well as routine clinical practice. To evaluate the clinical usefulness and psychometric properties of the COVID-19 Yorkshire Rehabilitation Scale (C19-YRS) in patients with PCS, a prospective, observational study of 187 consecutive patients attending a post-COVID-19 rehabilitation clinic was conducted. The C19-YRS was used to record patients' symptoms, functioning, and disability. A global health question was used to measure the overall impact of PCS on health. Classical psychometric methods (data quality, scaling assumptions, targeting, reliability, and validity) were used to assess the C19-YRS. For the total group, missing data were low, scaling and targeting assumptions were satisfied, and internal consistency was high (Cronbach's α = 0.891). Relationships between the overall perception of health and patients' reports of symptoms, functioning, and disability demonstrated good concordance. This is the first study to examine the psychometric properties of an outcome measure in patients with PCS. In this sample of patients, the C19-YRS was clinically useful and satisfied standard psychometric criteria, providing preliminary evidence of its suitability as a measure of PCS.

Preparations of Dutch emergency departments for the COVID-19 pandemic: A questionnaire-based study.

BACKGROUND: The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic was characterized by rapid increases in Emergency department (ED) patient visits. EDs required an appropriate transformation. The main challenges were: adapting capacity to respond to surges in the number of patient visits, protection of high risk (frontline) staff and the segregation of suspect-COVID-19 patients. To date, only a few studies have assessed the nation-wide response of EDs to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was designed to review the preparations of Dutch EDs during the initial phase of this public health crisis. METHODS: The study was designed as a nation-wide, cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study of Dutch hospital organizations having one or more EDs. One respondent completed the questionnaire for each hospital. The questionnaire was conducted between the first and the second COVID-19 wave in the Netherlands. It contained close-ended and open-ended questions on changes in ED infrastructure, ED workforce adaptions and the role of emergency physicians (EPs) in each hospital crisis management team. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 58 respondents. This represented 80% of the total number of EDs. All respondents had made preparations in anticipation of a COVID-19 patient surge. Treatment capacity was expanded in 70% of EDs, with a median increase of 49% (IQR 33-73%). Suspect-COVID-19 was segregated from non-COVID-19 patients in 89% of EDs. Alternative locations (such as outpatient departments) were more often used to assess non-COVID-19 patients, than for suspect-COVID-19 patients. Staff was expanded in 82% of EDs. This largely concerned nursing staff. A formal role for Emergency Physicians (EPs) in the hospital's crisis management team was reported by 94% of hospital organizations employing EPs. CONCLUSION: All Dutch EDs responded to the COVID-19 pandemic in a very short time span despite much uncertainty. Preparations predominantly concerned expansion of treatment capacity and segregation of COVID-19 ED care. EPs played a prominent role, both in direct COVID-19 care and in the hospital crises management team. It is vital for EDs to adapt to community needs swiftly. The ability of EDs to respond to the pandemic varied considerably.

Mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: longitudinal analyses of adults in the UK COVID-19 Mental Health & Wellbeing study.

BACKGROUND: The effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the population's mental health and well-being are likely to be profound and long lasting. AIMS: To investigate the trajectory of mental health and well-being during the first 6 weeks of lockdown in adults in the UK. METHOD: A quota survey design and a sampling frame that permitted recruitment of a national sample was employed. Findings for waves 1 (31 March to 9 April 2020), 2 (10 April to 27 April 2020) and 3 (28 April to 11 May 2020) are reported here. A range of mental health factors was assessed: pre-existing mental health problems, suicide attempts and self-harm, suicidal ideation, depression, anxiety, defeat, entrapment, mental well-being and loneliness. RESULTS: A total of 3077 adults in the UK completed the survey at wave 1. Suicidal ideation increased over time. Symptoms of anxiety, and levels of defeat and entrapment decreased across waves whereas levels of depressive symptoms did not change significantly. Positive well-being also increased. Levels of loneliness did not change significantly over waves. Subgroup analyses showed that women, young people (18-29 years), those from more socially disadvantaged backgrounds and those with pre-existing mental health problems have worse mental health outcomes during the pandemic across most factors. CONCLUSIONS: The mental health and well-being of the UK adult population appears to have been affected in the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. The increasing rates of suicidal thoughts across waves, especially among young adults, are concerning.

Looking Back to Move Forward: Reflections on the Strengths and Challenges of the COVID-19 UK Mental Health Research Response.

In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the swift response of mental health research funders and institutions, service providers, and academics enabled progress toward understanding the mental health consequences. Nevertheless, there remains an urgent need to understand the true extent of the short- and long-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health, necessitating ongoing research. Although the speed with which mental health researchers have mobilized to respond to the pandemic so far is to be commended, there are valid concerns as to whether speed may have compromised the quality of our work. As the pandemic continues to evolve, we must take time to reflect on our initial research response and collectively consider how we can use this to strengthen ensuing COVID-19 mental health research and our response to future crises. Here, we offer our reflections as members of the UK mental health research community to discuss the continuing progress and persisting challenges of our COVID-19 response, which we hope can encourage reflection and discussion among the wider research community. We conclude that (1) Fragmentation in our infrastructure has challenged the efficient, effective and equitable deployment of resources, (2) In responding quickly, we may have overlooked the role of experts by experience, (3) Robust and open methods may have been compromised by speedy responses, and (4) This pandemic may exacerbate existing issues of inequality in our workforce.

Postdischarge symptoms and rehabilitation needs in survivors of COVID-19 infection: A cross-sectional evaluation.

BACKGROUND: There is currently very limited information on the nature and prevalence of post-COVID-19 symptoms after hospital discharge. METHODS: A purposive sample of 100 survivors discharged from a large University hospital were assessed 4 to 8 weeks after discharge by a multidisciplinary team of rehabilitation professionals using a specialist telephone screening tool designed to capture symptoms and impact on daily life. EQ-5D-5L telephone version was also completed. RESULTS: Participants were between 29 and 71 days (mean 48 days) postdischarge from hospital. Thirty-two participants required treatment in intensive care unit (ICU group) and 68 were managed in hospital wards without needing ICU care (ward group). New illness-related fatigue was the most common reported symptom by 72% participants in ICU group and 60.3% in ward group. The next most common symptoms were breathlessness (65.6% in ICU group and 42.6% in ward group) and psychological distress (46.9% in ICU group and 23.5% in ward group). There was a clinically significant drop in EQ5D in 68.8% in ICU group and in 45.6% in ward group. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study from the United Kingdom reporting on postdischarge symptoms. We recommend planning rehabilitation services to manage these symptoms appropriately and maximize the functional return of COVID-19 survivors.